What does mean to have a talent or at least be good at something?

*disclaimer: I'm quite long winded lol, to skip my story, just read the bigger words*

I always thought my talent was a flop and something I’ll never be good at. I’ve always compared myself to so many different brilliant people in the world who are excellent in the field of what I love to do.. and if there were so many people who are so extraordinary in it, then where do I stand? Furthermore, I was taught that what I hold was impractical and not prospective at all – utter useless. Then if that’s the case, should I even continue what I felt I was talented in? Even more so, can I even classify that I’m talented.

I like to say one of my talents is in art. Art, not as in aesthetics like dancing and singing nor humanities like history and literature, but one that involves painting and drawing – anything that has to do with making something visually satisfying to look at. Yet I say this with much hesitant and with a heavy heart. I do that compliments on my artworks and a small degree of recognition, but I do not think my fare is really in art – not at least with so many years of endless passion trying to get here, with so many people ahead of me.

I do not have that “oomph”

There’s always some prodigy who are born to be disgustingly good just given a media to work with or one that has that “oomph”. I don’t remember where I heard this word oomph, but it was one of the books I read and I guess you’ll probably know it too because I myself don’t read much. You work your ass off for it yet you look at yourself with such disdain when you chance upon a good piece of work, and think to yourself, “will I even be that good?”

I have never won anything competition in regards to it

You may think I have that kindle with art but no, or not exactly. Look at it this way. When I was younger, I did a lot of art, more than most kids at least  (learning their piano and going for ballet classes). I would draw, be exposed to weird medias of art and take part in many art competitions my parents or school try to put me into. I have never won any. I was just happy with a certificate of participation and I always wondered why some really ugly pieces won? Like seriously ugly. Maybe mine was just as bad, or perhaps worse. I questioned myself a lot and looked at myself with disappointment. The only silly thing I won was a digital art using Paint at kindergarten and God knows who uses Paint to do art.

Art is not useful

In my years of academia, I’ve been molded slow and shape into recognizing art not being a useful talent, in both academics and non-academics. In the non-academic side, you cannot DSA with art. Direct School Admission (DSA) is how students who are not so academically stunning to get into prestigious schools in Singapore, via non-curriculum activities. In art, no matter how talented you are won’t get you into these schools. It was sports or performing arts or having some shitty leadership position in school that get you there, just not art. What can you contribute to the school with art anyway? Even if you could, they probably could teach hardworking ones to do it better than you, it is a skill after all.  Even in CCAs (co-curricular activities), Art Club was a lame CCA and a dumping ground for people who did not have any other CCA to go to. On the academics side, it was the same. I remember being in a triple science class in secondary school and I was pretty ambitious to request to take art as my ninth subject but my principal said no. She even persuaded me how art was really impractical and not prospective. I didn’t put in much thought then and I agreed not to take art.

When I entered junior college, I didn’t want anything in my life to do with art - drawing painting, anything. I did nothing unconventional in school and I conformed into the seemingly never-ending rat race. I did sports, took up leadership roles, excelled in studies and eventually entered university.

I guess what they say about the transition of a freshman to sophomore in university is really true. My outlook on education and particularly art took a 180 degrees turn. I used to do sports in my in my junior college and I always felt good telling people I’m in one, and I never confessed I liked drawing. Yet when I entered university and stopped doing sports altogether, I saw how fast my body degenerated. Half marathons used to be a usual thing after A levels but in the present, 5 km seems like a treacherous mountain I need to climb.

Art stands the test of time

I turned back to using times of leisure to do art – specifically painting. I realized how I never did any worse than before and I only got better.  I was pretty appalled at first, and rather satisfied. I never touched art for the past 2 years of my life yet I came out with something better. I thought about it a little and it was how my senses and outlook to anything visually appealing heightening over these years that came into play. I felt happier with what I was good at and I learned to embrace those exhaustively talented individuals’ love for art and hours of passion and their techniques put into an art piece. Instead of spiting at how bad I am, I start to learn the techniques they use and inculcate to make my art works better, and I do only get better. Even more so, they are remembered over so many centuries for their art and their art piece only appreciates as time goes by.

Art is so important in our everyday lives

I always thought I must win something in order to wow people and I look so many compliments for granted. I decded to take these compeiments to fuel passion and commitment, looking pass the pessimism I had. Even more astoundingly is how art is so celebrated by adults and industries. We can’t do advertising without design or a study of how to make something visually appealing. We can’t make a silly interface or machinery that are viable without the considerations of art and design.

Even in academia, design courses and fine arts are sought after that it is now so advocated and popular. It is obviously where the coolest and most hipster people from – mostly art schools like Lasalle and Temasek polytechnic. We don’t go unknown, just looking around and you see art everywhere. And to think I was taught to see art as being useless. Pathetic.

I feel contented with what I am good at. I still say this with much discomfort because I am never satisfied with my works and I do still feel I’m never good enough. What I know now is how to channel these emotions to only improve what is already supposed to be good. I think that talented is overrated and too highly celebrated via achievements and winning. These commissions and successes should be a bonus. What I really feel talent is about is that longing, passion and commitment that you have for the longest time. That thought that keep you coming back to what you love to do. It doesn’t have to be art; it could be sports, music or even academia, anything. And do not discount yourself from your talents just because it has not been succeeded, it is, after all, something you are good at – what you’re talented in. Art is a just a story I want to share that derived this thought I have.

Just a Thought

Whenever I decide to attempt to blog, I'm always so conflicted on what my blog should target at; like a simple demographic/aspect that I could work on…

and then ideas come to me in a mess. 

and I stop attempting to write a post altogether.

Superficial bitch.

it's been sometime i did any reflection and review of my soul-searching thoughts and i'm having quite the thing to write it down right now.

Sometimes i just wonder, are cliche conversations really superficial/ stereotypical? if not stereotypical, aren't they conventional. yet, don't we work on a general and simplified assumption because it is there, it is real and it is true?  I mean after all, many research papers and majors (well, for one, sociology thought I do not clearly know the entire subject of itself, and I do apologise if I have totally contradicted your major) focuses on what is stereotypical, what is the norm.

In my major, economics, we study trends we simplify thinks to follow a general graph or a rule. and these rules and understanding complies only because there are general consensus to it. after all, who is there to support what you write is approved either through the masses or a prestigious, well known individual, whom of course is famous because many people agree with him - ultimately a popularity contest. So because

Then comes the social aspect, many people like showing off on new media, thought catalog pages on what they feel, what makes them special unique, outstanding from the rest. but really, look deeper into these "uniqueness" and you would see it's because many people agree that they have that personality is what made it popular in the first place, what is agreeable to the public and so relatable to them. it isn't something special anymore - if everyone wanted to be special, don't you think it becomes a norm to want to feel special? It a demand, a need for attention, a social aspect of human lives to show someone that "hey, look, I am special [too - and i'm like the rest of you] you should establish a relationship with me"

I see many articles about introverts, horoscopes and zodiac, and I came to my own consensus that every part of each personality we are talked to by the article is just well conversed emotions. They're not something special to you, it's just something you feel to an extent and you agree with it. It is after all what is acceptable, specifically in the social aspect, and it is only acceptable because people have that general relation and idea to it. Perhaps what I would applaud the person who wrote such relatable topics so elaborately and conversely, but not that she is anyone unique. If you are so unique as a person, you'll probably be outcasted or condemned. Just look at people who have weird deformities or weird talents, they just kinda rejected as harsh as it sounds. Like the guy in the class who is a nerd or just freaking weird, he is really special you know that? but he is weird right, so you don't wanna talk to him. so are you really that unique? you're just socially accepted because you are just like someone else, perhaps cooler only because you something like someone else better. BUT, after all, what you did was to do what is conventional and made it conventionally "cooler"

thus, perhaps this is one way of looking at this innate inevitable aspect of humans and I like to think to myself this is yet a beauty in itself that we are so damn conventional and relatable. this is what makes us such social creatures and because everyone's talent to be so conventional, it makes us agreeable to live better in harmony and promote ideas to each other to improve on life as a while.